This article is a repost from the Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation web site.

Please acknowledge authorship when you post someone else's writing, thanks.

 http://www.homa.org/Details.asp?View=Detail&ContentID=2137352725

A World Where Womanhood Reigns Supreme
(The Seeds of My Own Re-evaluations)

When I joined the team of "Living Islam" two years ago, my perception of Islam was dominated by prejudice and ignorance, and I found its treatment of women abhorrent. To me the veil symbolised the oppression of women, making them invisible, anonymous and voiceless, and the cause of this oppression lay in the will to perpetuate the family and maintain a patriarchal framework - the very basis of an Islamic Society. I thought women were entirely submerged by divine justification of their role as wife and mother.

"Living Islam" was filmed over two years in 19 different countries and on location I was a lone female in an otherwise male team. I was aware that I especially should behave appropriately. In my mind, women were to be neither seen nor heard. My first trip took me to Mali - to an untypical Muslim community in the bush. Making sure to cover every bit of naked flesh while the men wandered around in short sleeves, I wondered what rooms I was permitted to enter and who I was permitted to talk to. But I also wondered whether my new-found meekness was not in part a reaction to the overpowering atmosphere of the patriarchal society I found my self in. Was this how Muslim women felt - resignation in the face of impossible odds?

The first Muslim woman I met in Mali was far removed from my preconception about the Muslim female. She was the wife of a Shaikh dedicated to converting pagan villagers to Islam. A sophisticated, well-educated woman, previously married to a diplomat, she had renounced a Western lifestyle for a life in purdah. In my eyesshe had sentenced herself to life imprisonment. But here was no prisoner, no poor downtrodden slave. A sharp intelligent and influential woman stood before me, clearly the one "who wore trousers" round here. Here seclusion gave her a status of honour and allowed her to exercise control from behind closed doors without confrontation. She was the bargainer, the head of the household, and the manager of her husbands affairs and schedule.

The emancipated woman in the West faces the conflict between confirmation of her femininity and the privileges that she associates with it, and repudiation of the confines of her female role and all the limitations that men want her to assume. From where I stood, this woman had transformed those limitations into priviliges.

On my next trip to northern Nigeria I met twoi more women who would alter my views even further. These were two women from the household of Shaikh Zakzaky, a fervent preacher of Jihad who urges his supporters to follow the example of Iran and replace the imerialistic western regime with an Islamic state. Zeenah Ibraheem, Zakzaky's wife and Fatima Yunus, her friend, had agreed to be interviewed about the role of women in Islam. They were in purdah and would only speak to another woman. The producer asked me to interview them. I was nervous apart from the fact that I had never interviewed anyone before. I was worred that my feminist sympathies would antagonise the women. But it was precisely these sympathies that Zeenah and Fatima themselves were questioning. Once again, the women were educated and articulate. And once again they had rejected the Western lifestyle which I considered so superior to Islam in its treatment of women.

As I took my seat on a carpet in the courtyard, the invisible boundary between men and women was a welcome partition, and within this boundary womanhood reigned supreme. This was a sharp contrast with the feelings from the previous days in locations where my presence had been acceptable only as an "honarary man". We had been filming the medieval theatrics of the 'Salla' celebrations that marked the end of Ramadan. Men, men, men everywhere: 500,000 men gathered for prayer on the morning of the Salla, men pouring into the inner courtyard of the Emirof Kano's inner courtyard to pay homage - I was grateful to be allowed to witness these events but at what price? The complete annihilation of my female identity?

But now I was taking the reins because of my sex. No more the feeling of inferiority and exclusion, as a novice in things Islamic surrounded by a team of experts, as a woman in a patriarchal society. Now the men were excluded. Apart from the cameraman and sound recordist, they were encouraged to stand well back. The cameraman covered his head and the camera with a black cloth - his very own veil. I was now in a world where the men had no voice.

The women talked and in their answers I saw the seeds of my own re-evalutions. They argued that the veil signified their rejection of an unacceptable system of values which debased women while Islam elevated women to a position of honour and respect. "It is not liberation where you say women should go naked. It is just oppression, because men want to see them naked." Just as to us the veil represents Muslim oppression, to them miniskirts and plunging necklines represent oppression. They said that men are cheating women in the West. They let us believe we're liberated but enslave us to the male gaze. However much I insist on the right to choose what I wear, I cannot deny that the choice is often dictated by what will make my body more attractive to men. Women cannot separate their identity from their appearance and so we remain trapped in the traditional feminine world, where the rules are written by men.

By choosing to wear the veil, these women were making a conscious decision to define their role in society and their relationship with men. That relationship appeard to be based more on exchange and mutual respect (a respect that was often lacking in the personal relationships I saw in the West), than the master/servant scenario I had anticipated. The Veil to them signified visual confirmation of their religious commitment, in which men and women were united, and for Zeenah and Fatima an even stronger commitment to a political ideal.

So were my notions of oppression in the form of the veil disqualified? If my definition of equality was free will then I could no longer define that oppression as a symptom of Islam. The women had all excercised their right to choose. To some extent, they were freer than me - I had less control over my destiny. I could no longer point at them and say they were oppressed and I was not. my life was influenced by male approval as theirs - but the element of choice had been taken out of mine. their situations and their arguments had, after all, served to highlight shortcomings in my view of my own liberty.

MARY WALKER

Mary Walker was Production Coordinator on the BBC2 series "Living Islam". Article courtesy of Impact Magazine

Mary makes a few very valid points but is deeply mistaken. Islam does oppress women, why can't women drive in Saudi Arabia? Also Sharia law means a womens say in court is half that of a man. Just because you met a few intelligent opinionated Muslim women, doesn't mean the latter is untrue? Don't take my word for it see what the Dutch Muslim woman Ali has to say:  http://www.ayaanhirsiali.web-log.nl/. This is not intended to criticise Muslims per se, before anyone leaps down my throat, but a literal following of Islam leads to a dreadful state of affairs: For instance:

1. Lower status for women as prescribed in Qu'ran.
2. 'Dhimitude' oppression for Jews and Christians, again from Qu'ran. As inflicted on Greeks and Armenians during the Ottoman Caliph.

I could go on but I will leave IMCers to make up their own minds. But before an Islamist apologist like that vacant cow Yvonne Ridley opens her trap again about Muslim Rights, consider what I have said. An unfortunate fact is that 'Islamic' states such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, repress women and non-muslims, have authoritarian governments and sponsor 'Jihadist' terrorism against Non-Muslims beacause as they see it their 'religon' tells them to.

Could the determined defenders of women’s rights like Paul try to refrain from using sexist terminology to abuse women activists who disagree with him (“vacant cow”). Unless of course he isn’t the principled fighter against women‘s oppression that he makes out to be but just another isamaphobe

I should not have used the term 'vacant cow'. However Yvonne Ridley is not a womens activist. She was the Mail correspondent imprisoned by the Taleban. Since her release, she has become a Muslim and now supports just about every Jihadist cause available. She wrote an article on the pro-jihad website, 'jihad unspun' in which she likened Britons who faught for the Taleban, as similiar to members of the International Brigades. A possible rejoinder to this ludricous claim would be that the International Brigades never fought against British troops or sponsored anti British terrorism and were anti-fascist and not Islamofascist! But never mind. Presumably you read the comments by Ali and thoose by similiar Muslims who are deeply critical of Islamic fundamentalism such as Salman Rusdie. Are you challenging my arguments or hauling nonsensical insults such as 'Islamaphobe'? I'll make it easier for you I am an Islamofascistphobe! Sounds much better.

"Islam does oppress women, why can't women drive in Saudi Arabia?"


And just look at the millions of Saudi women who expose their twats as a gesture of personal liberty via the internet...oh, no I meant western twats. What higher form of freedom exists beyond WP ? The most 'Western' of weapons, we'll respect your veil even as we char your flesh. Women and children ? Yes please.

Yeah, Islam oppresses women - unlike every other mysogynist form of patriachy that western males pay for...Isn't every Gary Glitter against the veil ? Shoot'em up.

You're right Danny about Patriarchial powere structures to an extent. Where did I say porn 'frees women'? Furthermore the points I made have been re-iterated by Muslims like Salman Rushdie, address those points. As for the 'showing of twats' that you refer to, I think that would be slightly preferable to the Islamic practice of female genital mutilation, perhaps?

002.228 Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

(Al-Baqara [The Cow])

The verse refers to divorce and possible pregnancy. Of course men have an advantage, they don't get pregnant.

oh come on - that was not written by a Muslim, it sounds like nonsense anti-islamic proganda filled with 2nd hand info from websites and the news because most of its incorrect and muslims in UK spell it as 'Muslim', not 'moselm', like american evangelists as Qur'an, not 'koran' and plus, it just sounds so fake, made up from nonsense ignorant drivel. either that or this woman is from one twisted islamic cultural sect or something.

paul shows ignorance by questioning why women in saudi can't drive and that female gential mutilation is an 'Islamic practise'.

paul doesn't like these things as don't most muslims. they are not islamic practices but cultural practices. not all muslims believe in female circumcision, only some ppl in africa and who knows why - they can use religion as an excuse but that doesn't mean islam endorses it in scripture or teaching.

also, women in saudi can't drive but women in england wearing a full veil and burka who follows the same islam as those in saudi CAN. why is that? it's not the islam that's the problem, it's the men in charge who are male chauvenists.

you have to look at social norms before blaiming the faith.. i'm sure those in Muslim countries look at western norms and blame christianity for porn, hooliganism, binge drinking, domestic violence, cloning and whatever else they see on the news - doesn't make it true though does it?

Do appreciate that like Christianity, the Muslim belief has it's 'own' versions depending on where you live or what church/synagogue/temple you go to

But no matter what on earth any believe i would like to ask this:

To ask a Muslim lady - what happens to a ‘good female Muslim’ When she dies?

Is it the same as earth but in a 'perfect' heavenly surrounding?

I have been told that good men can have ‘many wives’ to their beck and call in heaven
Does this sound ‘heavenly’ to you good Muslim women?
I am interested in your answer
Please correct me if I am wrong, but if your heaven is to serve a husband that has many wives – that you are at his beck and call forever – are you looking forward to dying?

What is written about Islam is incorrect. As an American muslim convert I'll break it down for you:

1) have to pray five times a day, fast one month out of the year and cover myself from head to toe in yards of black fabric. I am eligible to be married and can be punished for any wrong doing.

There is nothing in the Qu'ran about covering yourself in "black" fabric, nor has any fattwa ever been issued declaring that black is the only color. Yes, correct women must be covered, covering your body is wajib, or neccessary whilst covering your face is sunnah or "extra." Your face and hands and feet may be exposed.

While marrying at a younger age is encouraged so that people are less likely to sin with pre-marital sex. A woman can refuse to marry a certain man if he does not please her, there is no such thing as forced marriage within the religion though it happens within the culture. For i.e. does Catholicism encourage pedophilia? (sp) no, it doesn't however it happens because humans are flawed, imperfect and often quite evil...


2) I am not allowed to swim, ski, ride a bike, dance, learn to play musical instruments, practice gymnastics, or any other sport. I am not even permitted to watch men play sports, either in the stadium and/or on television.

False, Many mosques have programs where women can do these things, there is NO SUCH quote or hadeeth that says women are not allowed to swim, find me where you are getting such b****t info please.
Women can swim, they can dance, they can be athletic as long as it's in the prescence of women or other immediate family.

3)My father, grandfather, uncles, brothers or my male cousins are not allowed to be present at any ceremonies for my accomplishments. They will not be allowed to participate in my birthday parties.

Birthday parties aren't celebrated because the only celebrations traditionally are religious ones. HOWEVER there is nothing that says that ceremonies (for i.e. graduations, events) cannot be celebrated. Not only are you spreading incorrect information about Islam which- if you are in fact a muslim, which I suspect - no...if you ARE it's haram (bad).

4)I am to be treated by female doctors. Go to female dentists. And if there are none, then I have to go without or I must be examined through some sort of divider.

It is untrue that if female doctors are unavailable that one should go without. Very untrue, whilst female practionners are preferred, if none are available then male doctors should be consented. Yes, everything else must be covered, but one should never neglect one's health, duh!

5) I am not allowed to practice birth control or have abortions, even if carrying or having a child means I have to die.

Lies. The Mother must always be saved if the mother/child is at risk. Who will raise the child if not? The husband, yes typically will work while the wife maintains the house and children. It's clear that no research was done on your part.

Women can also work, the money that she gains from work is hers alone however she doesn't have to work.
Women have many rights that the religion grants them, however yes there are jerks and chaunvanists that keep them lagging behind.

Tired of going thru and correcting you....let me just provide a list to aid your comprehension:

In a truely Islamic society women have the following rights in Islam:
1. The right and duty to obtain education.

2. The right to have their own independent property.

3. The right to work to earn money if they need it or want it.

4. Equality of reward for equal deeds.

5. The right to express their opinion and be heard.

6. The right to provisions from the husband for all her needs and more.

7. The right to negotiate marriage terms of her choice.

8. The right to obtain divorce from her husband, even on the grounds that she simply can't stand him. (pls note that God deeply frowns upon divorce as a solution unless there is hardly any other alternative but it does not mean that men have more right to divorce their wives than women do.)

9. The right to keep all her own money (she is not responsible to maintain any relations).

10. The right to get sexual satisfaction from her husband.

11. custody of their children after divorce.

12. to refuse any marriage that does not please them

Elevation of Women's Status
by Shaikh Ali Al-Timimi
The topic that I was asked to discuss here at McGill University is the elevation of the status of women in Islaam. Many, upon hearing the title of this lecture, might assume it to be an oxymoron because the prevalent idea - at least in the West - is that Islaam does not elevate the status of women, but that Islaam oppresses and suppresses women. So people might find the title in itself to be shocking or a curiosity at least.
In discussing this topic - since it appears to me that this is a mixed audience of Muslims and non-Muslims - I'd like to make my remarks and comments brief. I will take no more than thirty to forty five minutes, and then allow you an opportunity to ask your questions. Perhaps the question and answer session might be more fruitful in addressing specific accusations, understandings or misunderstandings regarding the status of women in Islaam.

As we all know, in the world today, there are - for the overwhelming majority of humanity - basically two world views. These two views are often in conflict - not only on the personal level where individual human beings are making choices, but also on the international level in terms of the debate over the authenticity and correctness of these two world views.

The first world view, which I am sure most of us are aware of, is the Western liberal view. A view which claims to draw its roots from the Judeo-Christian tradition that probably, upon investigation, is more well rooted in the ideas that appeared after the reformation; ideas that are rooted in secularism and the world view that appeared thereafter during the 'era of enlightenment'.

The second view is that of the Muslims - the Islamic world view, and this view says that its roots and ideas lie in the revelation given by God (or Allah in Arabic) to the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam). Those who proclaim this view say that it can be used by humanity during all ages and times, and that its relevance and benefit is not restricted to a certain period of time, geographic area or certain race of human beings. Likewise, the adherents of the first view, that of

Western secularism and the liberal tradition, believe that their world view, ideas, culture and civilization are the best for humanity. Some of you might have read a book that came out a few years ago by an American author of Japanese decent (Francis Fukuyama) called "The End of Time". He basically put forth the theory that human development in terms of its ideas has concluded with this final period of liberal secular thought and nothing more will come to humanity. However in his book he adds that that the only part of the world which has not adopted this secular human view is the Islamic world and proposes that there will be a conflict in terms of this ideology in the Islamic world.

With that brief introduction, one of the topics of contention between these two worlds views, that of the secular liberal humanist in the West and the Islamic tradition, concerns women. What is the position and status of women? How are women looked to? Are women elevated in one culture and oppressed in another?

The Western view is that women are elevated only in the West and that they are getting more and more rights with the passage of time, while their sisters - they say - in the Islamic world are still being suppressed. The Muslims who they encounter say that in actuality it is the Islamic system that provides the true freedoms for men and women alike, and women in the West as well as men, are deceived into an idea of freedom which really doesn't exist. What I'd like to discuss this evening is exactly how Islaam looks to women. And therefore my discussion will be more upon - what we might say for the lack of a better term - the philosophical basis, rather than the individual practices which vary from one country to the other. How women are understood in Islaam cannot be properly understood - and this is more significant, I feel - unless one understands exactly what we might call the philosophical basis or ideological understanding - since this is really a theological concept.

First, let's review how exactly women were thought of and understood in the western tradition, to compare and contrast perspectives. We know that the western tradition sees itself as the intellectual inheritors of the Greek tradition that existed before the prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), and so therefore many of the intellectual traditions of the West are found to some degree in the writings of the early Greek philosophers like Aristotle, Plato and so forth.

How did they look towards women? What were the ideas of Aristotle and Plato towards women? When one reviews the works of these early Greek philosophers, he finds that they had very disparaging views of women. Aristotle in his writings argued that women were not full human beings and that the nature of woman was not that of a full human person. As a result, women were by nature deficient, not to be trusted and to be looked down upon. In fact, writings describe that the free women in many aspects of the Greek society - except for the very few women of the elite classes - had positions no better than animals and slaves.

This Aristotelian view of women was later carried on into the early Christian tradition of the Catholic church. Saint Thomas of Aquinas in his writings proposed that women were the trap of Satan. The issue of Adam and Eve added a dimension to the earlier Greek ideas of Aristotle; women were the cause of the downfall of man and therefore were Satan's trap and should be looked at with caution and weariness because they caused the first downfall of humanity and all thus evil precedes from women. This type of thought was persistent within the writings of the Church fathers throughout the Middle Ages. In their writings we find this theme proposed in one aspect or another. However, after the Protestant reformation Europe decided to free itself from the shackles and chains of the Catholic church. Ideas which have been entitled as the Age of Enlightenment or thought of as such, caused them to feel that they needed to free themselves from many of these ideas. Some of these ideas were scientific in nature, that the earth goes around the sun, instead of the sun going around the earth; theological in nature, as in the writings of Martin Luther; and also social in nature, like the position of women in society. However, the writers of the Enlightenment still carried this basic theme that was not much of a switch - women where not full human beings. French writers during the revolution, like Rousseau, Voltaire and others, looked at women as a burden that needed to be taken care of. This is why I believe it's Rousseau in his book "Emile", which he wrote concerning the education of women, proposed a different form of education for women based upon the fact that women were unable to understand what men were able to understand.

This is the tradition that the West inherited and thereafter we find in the 1800's the first writings appearing by women and some men calling for the change of these ideas. And with this we have the origins of the first feminine movements. One of the first books written was the "Vindication for the Rights of Women" by Mary Walsencraft which appeared in the 1800's. Thereafter the tradition of women receiving certain rights came. The first of these were basically legal rights because until the 1800's women were not able to own property and were not able to dispose of their wealth as men did. It is very well known that the first laws that allowed women to own property in the United States or in Europe appeared only in the last couple of decades of the 1800's.

The Industrial Revolution caused another impetus, another search, to this feminist movement. Women in the Industrial Revolution, especially England, were forced to labor for many hours in the coal mines and so forth, and would receive no pay whatsoever compared to men. So therefore the first calling of the movement was that people who work the same amount of hours deserved the same amount of money or pay.

Finally a break occurred in this century of basically all which is understood from the Western tradition. Coming from the latter feminist movement which appeared after World War II, a new movement called for the emancipation of women not only in terms of legal rights, but it also questioned some of the morals of society and called for greater sexual freedoms for women and men alike. It contended that basically a lot of problems were caused by the institution of marriage and the ideas of family and so forth. People wrote concerning the need to break from these.

And finally in the 1990's, the prevalent argument in the West is that we should discuss genders, not sexes. This idea was expressed recently in a book which came out a year ago called "The Age of Extremes". The author discusses the idea that there is no difference between male or female and that gender is so only due to environment. So therefore we can change the environment so that men could take the roles of women and women take the roles of men by changing the education and climate. This is where it has ended up now. So we find in this 2500 year old western tradition, we come from the first extreme which was expressed by the Greeks, where women were denied their essential humanity, to this extreme expressed today where there is no differences between the sexes and it is an issue of gender, climate and environment. This is, of course, a very brief summary of the first world view. I didn't do justice to those 2500 years in just those few minutes, but it just gives us an idea.

The other view which I would like to talk about in more detail is the Islamic view. How does Islaam look at the issue of women? Well, first of all, we should understand that Muslims unlike, for instance, the Greek philosophers or the French writers after the French revolution, do not feel that their concepts, ideas and beliefs are those of fellow men. But rather they believe that what they are taught, what they believe, what they practice, and all that is tied to this, is part of a divine revelation given to them by God. And so, its truth and veracity is not questionable because of it being revelation from God. The argument is that God knows best that which He created. He created human beings, He is a God of wisdom, and a God of all knowledge and so therefore He knows what is best. And He decrees that which is best for humanity, His creatures. Therefore, Muslims try to live by a code of law which is an expression of that belief.

Now I don't want to discuss the various details of the code of law because that, I feel, would not really benefit us in this lecture. Although perhaps some of that might come out in the question and answer session and I'll be glad to entertain any questions you might have. But what I would like to discuss is how does Islaam look at women, i.e. what is womanhood in Islaam? Did Muslims believe like the early Greek writers or early church fathers that women were not full human begins? Did they feel that women where Satan's trap, so therefore should be shunned and looked at as something evil and dangerous? How did they perceive women? Upon investigating into the traditions of Islaam which is, as I said, based on revelation known as the Qur'aan, we find that it becomes very clear that Muslims are taught that men and women share a single humanity - that they are equal in their humanity and that there is no difference in the amount of human nature in them. We might now take that for granted, but as I explained, the initial western civilization was based on the fact that women were not full human beings.

So this being something that was taught 1400 years ago was a revolutionary idea in the sense that it is only within the last 100 years or so that the issue of women being full human beings has come to be accepted in western intellectual circles. Initially, women were not considered full human beings.

The Qur'aan in describing the origins of human beings tells them, the translation of which would be something like "O humanity! Verily we have created you from a single male and a single female, and have made you into tribes and peoples so that you may know one another. Verily the most honorable of you are those who are most pious with God." [49:13] This verse in the Qur'aan teaches that humans come from a single male and a single female. The indication here is that the male and female in terms of their human nature are at an equal level. Likewise another verse, from a chapter which is known in the Qur'aan as the chapter of Women - because most of the issues discussed there are laws dealing with women - starts off with a verse which could be translated as "O humanity! Verily We have created you from a single soul, and have made from it its mate," this is a reference to Adam and Eve, "and have made from both of them many people, men and women, and scattered them throughout the earth." [4:1] So here again is the issue of men and women and all human beings coming from a single source, a single family, a single set of parents. This shows that women share in full humanity with men.

Likewise in the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) - which is the second source of the Islaamic religion - we find that the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said in a Hadith that indeed verily women are the twin halves of men. The Arabic word shaqaa'iq, which I translated as twin halves, means taking something and splitting it in half. The understanding is that there is a single humanity, a single essence which is shared, and there are twin halves of that - one is man and one is women. This is repeated often in the Qur'aan. The words of the Prophet Mohammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) also emphasize this. As I said, this is a very important concept to understand when one reflects on how traditional western civilization looked at women as not being full partners and not sharing in humanity. Although now, we might not find much surprise to that because it is a given perhaps that men and women are full human beings. But this is something that is a late occurrence in western traditions.

Let us take it to another step, what is the aim of humanity? What is the purpose for which human beings exist on earth, to what ends do they strive? What will occur to them if they strive to those ends and what will occur to them if they did not strive to those ends? Since Islaam is a religion which sees itself as revelation from God and the truth, Muslims would feel that human beings have a set purpose here on earth; that in everything of God's creation there is wisdom. There is nothing of God's creation that does not have any wisdom. There is nothing for sport or play and so therefore human beings have a purpose, and that purpose has been elucidated for them in the teaching of Islaam. They were created to worship God. A verse from the Qur'aan says that God says that He has not created human beings except to worship Him. So therefore, the essence of humanity is the same between male and female, and they also share the same aim and that is to worship God. And that is the most important issue in the Islamic culture and civilization. You know that the Islamic culture and civilization is rooted in religious belief. American civilization is rooted in what? In the writings of the founding fathers of the United States of America. It is rooted in the Declaration of Independence, the ideals which were placed therein. It is rooted in the Constitution of the United States. It is rooted in some of the arguments between monarchy or democracy which were written by some of the early writers or founding fathers. So it is rooted in a political thought. Yes, it might have some traditions which go back further and extend to certain ideas like in parts of Christianity and so forth, but in its essence it is a political thought, unlike Islaam which is a religion in its essence.

The civilization of Islaam - a civilization which is 1400 years old - is one which is rooted in religion. For a Muslim the greatest aim is to serve God, to worship God alone, and that is what the word Muslim means.

Muslim is not a racial description, it is not an ethnic category, Muslim means one who submits. Islaam means submitting to the will of God - the voluntary submission to God - so Islaam is a religion of submission. Therefore, in the most important aspect of the Islamic religion, we find that men and women share in the same aim and are expected to have the same responsibilities, in that men and women are both required or obligated to testify that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone - God alone - and that Muhammad is His Messenger. Men and women are both obligated to pray five times a day, which is the second pillar of Islaam. They are obligated to fast the month of Ramadan. They are obligated to make pilgrimage to Makkah. They are obligated to give charity. They are obligated to have the same beliefs. They are obligated to have the same type of morality and the same type of code of conduct and behavior.

Men and women share these essential ingredients of Islamic behavior, which define a Muslim from a non-Muslim. And this is of extreme importance because it breaks from the tradition of religions. For instance fifty years before the birth of the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) who was born around 560 CE we find that there was a gathering of bishops in France to discuss whether women possessed souls or not, and that, if they do possess souls, what would be their purpose on earth? Was it to worship God? And if they worshipped God, would they go to paradise? In the end it was decided that, yes, women do possess souls - which was a break from previous tradition - but that their purpose was not just to worship God, but also to serve men.

In Islaam, however, the basis of submission is not that women are submitting to men, but that men and women together submit to God. So therefore, when you read the passages of the Qur'aan, it becomes very clear that the obedient from among both the believing men and women receive paradise, which is the greatest aim and objective in a Muslim's life, and the basis of that civilization. Likewise, those who are disobedient and who are renegades, and who do not want to worship God also receive the same punishment whether they are male or female. This is why throughout the Qur'aan you find the wording addressed to both males and females. The Arabic language like French has two types of verbs, one representing the feminine and one the masculine. So in the Qur'aan you'll find both categories of the human race, both sexes, being addressed. This you find over and over and over. There is no need to now recite all these passages, but they are there if anyone wants to know.

In summary we found three bases: that they share the same humanity, that they have the same aim on this earth, and also, they expect the same reward, which is the goal which they are working for collectively as human beings. And this is a break as I said from the previous religious traditions and also political and social understanding prevalent among the philosophers before the coming of Islaam. And as a result of that, we find that Islaam accorded women rights which perhaps we take for granted now, but were given by God to men and women some 1400 years ago. These rights like the right to own property, the right to dispose of property according to their own wishes as long as they follow the laws of the religion of Islaam, which apply the same for men or women and the right to certain what we would call now political rights, like the right to enter into a treaty with combatant, are something very recent relatively speaking in the West.

One of the rights given by Islaam in the time of the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) was that if a woman gives a treaty to a combatant from a non-Muslim attacking force - her treaty would be considered as was the case with a female companion of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam). In the Christian church these companions would be called disciples for instance, the disciples of the Prophet Muhammad are the companions as they are called. They were in the hundreds and thousands not just twelve as with Jesus Christ, and there are both men and women amongst them. When the prophet Muhammad came to Mecca, one of the women companions by the name of Umm Hani, who was an inhabitant of Mecca and a believer in the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam), accorded certain relatives of hers protection that they would not be harmed. Her brother who was one of the main companions of the Prophet Muhammad and married his daughter, Ali Bin Abi Talib, wanted to execute two of these men who were known for harming the Muslims and fighting against them. So Umm Hani went to the Prophet Muhammad and complained that she had accorded them protection and the Prophet recognized her giving protection to those two individuals.

This is what we might call, in the classification and terminology that we now use, a political right. In the sense of according protection for another person during the state of war is something which is relatively new in the West and was a known tradition in the Islamic world 1400 years ago. Likewise, in terms of what we might call public participation, there are certain acts of worship which are public acts of worship in Islaam, and there are certain acts of worship which are private. One of the public acts is the pilgrimage, when men and women all make pilgrimage, and this is one of the pillars of Islaam. Likewise another public act of worship is the two `Eid prayers which occur twice a year, once after the pilgrimage and once after the pass of Ramadan. Men and women both participate in that publicly. Likewise, we have a verse which shows that the social contract between men and women is the same in Islaam. This verse might be translated as the following: "And the believing men and women are," what we might translate as, "awliyaa" - the word in Arabic for friends or allies or supporters of one another, "they" - meaning men and women - "bid to that which is correct" i.e. they commend that which is correct, "and they forbid that which is evil". And this is a corrective process in society, removing evil and commending that which is good. And then "they perform the prayer", both men and women, "they pay the alms", or the charity to the poor, "and they obey God and His Messenger." And then God shows them the reward and that they are those upon whom God will have mercy and God is Almighty and All-Wise.

So in this verse, we find that the social contract between men and women, as individuals in the society, is the same, that they both go for the highest goal of bidding or commanding that which is correct, forbidding that which is evil, and that they share in the two major acts of worship, which are the prayer and giving charity. They share in the beliefs and obedience to God and obedience to the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) and likewise, they share in the reward in the end of obtaining Allah's mercy. This is a very important concept, which is in contradiction with what the western tradition is upon today, and that is as I said as a result of the initial extreme of the Greek philosophers that women did not share in humanity. As the result of that extreme another extreme occurred - at least the Muslims consider it extreme - that there is no difference between men and women.

So therefore, the idea of having genders - this is a term which is not used in a biological sense, as we might use the word sex in a biological sense for male and female, but the understanding today is that the traits that define maleness or femaleness, the social traits and so forth are determined by upbringing, culture, and environment and that there is no inherent difference in the way men and women think or act or what their make up is and so forth. And that is why they use the term gender.

This extreme resulted from the initial extreme that occurred 2000 years ago, when the Greek thought that the women did not posses humanity. So as a result of this 2000 year processes we now come to another extreme - at least this is what Muslims would say - this extreme now is that men and women are the same, that there is no difference.

Islaam, although confirming that men and women do share in the same essence of humanity, also confirms that men and women are different. But does this difference mean that men are inherently good or women are inherently evil? No. And this is why when you look at one of the verses in the Qur'aan that sheds light on this aspect, God says, recounting His creation, that He is the One Who created the night, as it envelops, as it comes - if you look at the horizon, it comes like a sheet enveloping the horizon - and He is the One Who created the day as it comes bursting, shining, - that is how Sun rises and He is the One Who created male and female. And then the next verse says, verily, what you strive for - human beings are into different ends, diverse ends - some strive for God's pleasure, some strive for disobedience of God, some strive to do good to humans, some strive to do harm, different ends. But what is the example here? God mentions night and day and then mentions male and female. The understanding is, yes, night has a purpose, and in the Qur'aan you always find verse after verse, describing that night has a wisdom behind it. And also it tells humanity that had it been only night and no day human beings could not live on earth. And this is now shown scientifically that if it was only night and there was no sunlight, certain hormones of body would not be able to reproduce and human beings would die. Life as we know it on earth would not exist. And likewise, day has its wisdoms behind it. But can one argue and say, that night is good and day is evil? No, and no Muslim would believe that. And can one argue and say that day is good and night is evil? No. Likewise, male and female also have their roles to play. But can one say that the role of men is inherently good and the role of women is inherently evil? No. And can one say the opposite to that - the role of women is inherently good and the role of men is inherently evil? No. But they both have a role.

This is the main contention now between western thought and Islamic belief. Western thought has basically accepted, except for maybe some few corners perhaps in the Vatican or so, that men and women share in their humanity and that they are the same. Muslims have believed this for 1400 years. But the difference is that in western thought, as a reaction to the initial thought that women did not share humanity fully, the argument is that the roles of men and women in society are only defined by culture, environment and upbringing, therefore there is really no true role for men and no true role for women and that we can switch this, if we just teach the society correctly. But in Islaam there is a defined role for men and a defined role for women. Who is the one who defines this role for men and women? It's their creator. This is the major, if you want to use the term philosophical, even though it is an inaccurate term in that sense, but we can just use if for the lack of

better term, philosophical, ideological or theological difference between the two opposing arguments. Now with that said, it is important to understand that when Islaam gave these roles to men and women alike, it put responsibilities equal to obligations to both. I will give you an example for that: Islaam senses that women have the nature of mother not by cultural tradition or by sociological system but inherently are better in providing and taking care of the offspring, that there is a bond there which goes beyond tradition. A psychological bonding, a physical bonding, something which is more than just traditions of human beings. As a result of that it has placed greater responsibilities upon women towards their children are then those of men.

At the same time, the obligations that children have towards their mother in Islaam is greater than they have towards their fathers, and this is why when the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) was asked by a man one was his companions "Who should I befriend in this world?" The prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) replied "your mother." And then the man asked a second time, and the prophet replied your mother, and then a third time, and again he replied your mother, and on the fourth time, he said "your father". Likewise in the Qur'aan we find that it tells human beings that your mother bore you from one hardship to the other hardship, talking about the labors and difficulties of pregnancy and childhood, and then fed you for two years, suckled you, and tells us to be kind to our parents and reminds us of our mother first before our fathers.

The point is that even though it has defined a role for women with the children which is different than the role of the father, at the same time it gives women honor and respect from their children which is greater than that received by the fathers. The fathers do receive respect and their honor, they are not just thrown out of the picture, but it is given to them and according to the degree of their responsibility. And likewise, because the mother inherently, not just because of cultural tradition, has something inherent which makes that bond greater between her and her child then the male. She receives a greater honor and respect from the child and at the same time she is required to give a greater obligation.

I only gave that as an example to show you that while Islaam recognizes differences between the sexes, it does not accept the concept that gender is just an issue of upbringing or cultural traditions, for there are inherent differences in males and females, and as a result of that the obligations and responsibilities of each of the two sexes are together. Imported from that is another matter that even though men and women are different, they are not in opposition to one another, which is the basis of much of the western thought and especially of feminist traditions. That there's a struggle between men and women, "There is a battle of sexes", as it is sometimes said in the popular sort of designation. This doesn't exist in Islaam. Men and women work in tandem, just like day and night revolve, and you live in day time and you live in night time. You cannot live only in night, and you cannot live only in day, likewise, men and women are not against one another, they are not pitted against one another but rather they share in the same aim, the same purpose of being, the same humanity. They have different roles, but these roles complement one another and are needed by one another in order for the success of humanity, not in this world, but also - of course since Muslims believe in the hereafter- in the hereafter, which is the ultimate goal for Muslims.

Now, I would like to make one final comment and then I'll leave it open for questions. Let's look at the applicabilities of both of these programs. We discussed a lot of ideas, thoughts and beliefs and historical concepts, but when they are actually applied, which of the two view points is more successful. Which brings more bliss to humanity? Is it the secular western view or is it the Islaamic view? And I have a concrete example which I'd like to share with you. When I was in Beijing this last summer for the UN 4th world conference on the women, there was a platform for action which was being discussed by the different nations and organizations there. The aim of the platform for action was to upraise, uplift, and to embetter the status of women around the world, which are of course noble and correct aims, there is no contention concerning that. The platform for action was divided into different areas of concentrations, such as poverty, health, finances, conflicts and violence and so forth, and one of it was the girl child. The 12th issue of the 12 concerned areas for the platform for action, the girl child, the status of girls - future women - in the world today. The country which was hosting the conference, China is known for the practice of killing girls. The reason why is because of their population. You can only have one child per couple and Chinese by their tradition view males as fewer then females and so as a result they will usually kill the female child, in hope that the wife gives birth to a boy.

This is an issue which exists and because the hosts were the Chinese, the United Nations didn't really want to get into this issue. They didn't want to talk about it because it was not politically correct to address that issue in China. Moreover, even though they might have passed certain regulations, platforms for actions and certain commitments which they have required of citizens of the world to follow, they at the end will see that perhaps in twenty-five to fifty years the status of the world child will not have markedly improved.

We can see from other things, one of the major issues which the United Nations was created for after World War II, was the slaughter of so many million human beings, six million Jews in Europe, and yet fifty years later, in the year of the fiftieth celebration of the UN, a genocide has taken place in Europe of the Bosnians. All the human rights, all of the declarations in the last fifty years has not been able to change anything on the ground. Now when the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) was sent to the Arabs, the Arabs had the same practice. They used to kill their girl children. The Arabs killed their girls for a number of reasons, most of the time due to poverty. Being a desert people without industry or any sort of means of trade, existence was very minimal. And as a result, out of fear of poverty they would kill their girl children, and they would bury them alive. This is a fact which is mentioned in the Quraan and was well known during the time of the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam). God condemns in the Quraan with verses, the idea of killing of the girl child, the burying in the ground, and also the attitudes of the Arabs towards girls. One verse in the Quraan says that "when he is given the good news that his wife is given birth." God calls it a good news, " - to a female child, a girl - his face becomes blackened and he becomes ashamed. Will he hide the fact "that he has given birth to a girl and not tell the people, because he feels it as a shame. "Or will he bury it in the ground", this is a condemnation of the practice of the people. And likewise the companions of the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) before they accepted Islaam, many of them killed their girl children. One man came to prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) and said I killed ten of my daughters in my lifetime, will I receive paradise? For will God accept my repentance for this sin, now that I have left this pagan religion of before, worshipping idols and killing girl children and so forth. Within one generation, within 23 years this was how long the prophet was amongst the Arabs, the practice of killing girls ended. It no longer existed in Arabia. And likewise, it didn't just stop like that, but a change in attitude came towards women, in educating them and making morally upright people.

People receive no other reward, but paradise. Again that is the greatest aim for the Muslim and that is their motivation and reason of being. So Islam not only tried removing the negative aspect of murdering girls, but also included the positive aspect of educating girls and raising them in society, and this brings me to my final point. This is something of course which we can look at the previous declarations of human rights or whatever, irrespective of whether these being true or false, but they have not been able to achieve the aims which they have stated. As the example of human rights and the UN in Bosnia shows.

Fifty years after the creation of the UN, there is no change in Europe, the same land which killed six million Jews. The same genocide of the Bosnians occurs fifty years later by the same people who started the UN. They are unable to stop their own from this matter, and with this I come to my final point, that I would like to leave you with. Islaamic civilization unlike any other civilization is based, of course on revelation, but it is in its essence supported and founded by women. The first person to believe in Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) was his wife Khadeejah, and it was through her money and through her support of him, her financial backing, and also her encouragement that the prophet was able to spread the message of Islaam in his first year of prophecy. The pagans did not have the ideas of freedom of religion, that you can take your own beliefs. This was not practiced by the pagans of Arabia - they saw this as an insurrection, they saw this as a changing of their ways, so they sought to stop it out by torture, by killing and by all other means that they could. And likewise, they tried to stop the Islaamic revelation, this tradition, when the prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) converted only the people of Arabia. But as you know there are about one billion Muslims in the world. They are in every single continent of the world, even in Beijing where the UN was convening. There was a mosque there which is over a thousand years old. And the neighborhood that lives there is about forty to fifty thousands Muslims. Now the king’s palace, the forbidden city in front of Tien Anh Man square which many of you have heard of, is only 500 years old. This shows how the growth of Islaam and the sprit of Islaam is not just a Middle Eastern phenomenon or an Arabian phenomenon but extends to all people and races throughout the world.

Where is this teaching from, of course when prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) died after twenty three years Islaam only spread in Arabia. This religion of Islam was basically spread by four or five individuals who had the most in teaching. One of them was the prophet's wife `Aa’isha. She is among the most to have narrated his statements and likewise she is amongst the three, four, five who have mostly given religious pronouncements, who have given religious verdicts, explained what these verses in the Quraan meant or what the words of the prophet meant.

Look at any other civilization in the history of humanity, you will not find a women playing a role in its establishment where it can be attributed to her efforts for its establishment. The Greeks - look at the philosophers Plato, Aristotle and others - all were men. The early church fathers writings were basically men and until today the idea of women scholarship is limited in some areas of the church. The French writers at the French revolution and Voltaire and the Russians were men. The founding fathers of the United States were men, and also other civilizations are basically based upon men. Islam is the only civilization which is known by humanity where a leading input in terms of its transmission and establishment was based upon the efforts of women. Central - and this is an historical matter which is not open to interpretation, it is a fact - these are the people who transmitted these teachings these are the people who supported it hereafter. Those are just some thoughts and impressions concerning how Islaam uplifted women.




There are only few